What Works in Jail Leadership:

Evidence from a Servant Leadership Experiment

Frank V. Ferdik, PhD and Hayden P. Smith, PhD

Leadership is widely discussed across professions—but in corrections, and especially in jails, it often remains unclear in practice. While most agree leadership matters, far fewer can identify what type of leadership works, how it works, or whether it improves outcomes. In environments defined by staffing shortages, high turnover, and constant operational pressure, this lack of clarity has real consequences. Leadership directly affects safety, organizational culture, and staff well-being, yet it has often been guided more by tradition than by evidence. Without rigorous evaluation, leadership risks remain a vague ideal rather than a practical tool for improving operations.

This article focuses on one leadership approach—servant leadership—and translates findings from one of the first experimental tests of leadership in U.S. jails into practical guidance for correctional professionals. The goal is to provide insight into a leadership style supported by evidence and capable of improving staff effectiveness and organizational outcomes.

What is a Servant Leadership—and Why It Fits Jails

Servant leadership is grounded in a straightforward idea: leaders exist to support their staff so they can perform effectively. Originally proposed by Greenleaf (1970), this approach emphasizes prioritizing employee needs, development, and well-being while still advancing organizational goals. In practice, this includes listening to staff, communicating clearly, treating employees fairly, supporting professional growth, and modeling expected behavior.

In correctional environments, this approach is especially relevant because leadership is a primary driver of organizational culture. When supervisors are perceived as unsupportive, unclear, or unfair, workplace culture deteriorates, and officer stress increases. In contrast, leaders who are respectful, transparent, and supportive contribute to stronger cultures and better staff outcomes. Despite this, many officers report that this type of leadership is largely absent in their facilities, highlighting a key reality: in jails, leadership is not just a management function, but a frontline operational factor.

What We Tested: Leadership in Real Jail Conditions

To move beyond theory and examine what leadership looks like in practice, this study tested leadership in real jail conditions. Tennessee jails provide a unique and valuable setting for understanding leadership in corrections. The state operates under centralized oversight through the Tennessee Corrections Institute, which promotes consistency in standards while still allowing variation across facilities. At the same time, many jails—particularly large, urban facilities—face persistent staffing shortages (often 10–15% vacancy rates), mandatory overtime, and high-demand populations.

The study used a cluster randomized experimental design—one of the strongest approaches for establishing cause and effect. From a pool of 126 facilities, three large, urban Tennessee jails with similar characteristics (e.g., 200+ staff, average daily populations around 700) were selected. One jail was randomly assigned to receive a servant leadership intervention, while two served as control sites.

More than 240 correctional officers participated across two waves of data collection, with response rates exceeding 50%. Supervisors in the treatment jail (n = 9 sergeants and lieutenants) completed a structured, multi-course servant leadership training over approximately 10 weeks. Officers completed surveys before and after the intervention measuring organizational culture, depression, anxiety, and burnout. Importantly, officers were not told which facility received the intervention, reducing the likelihood that results were driven by expectations rather than actual changes in leadership behavior.

What We Found: Leadership That Changes Outcomes

The results provide strong evidence that leadership can be changed—and that those changes matter in real jail settings. First, officers in the treatment jail reported substantial improvements in organizational culture. Culture scores increased from 21.18 to 29.95, reflecting stronger perceptions of communication, fairness, and teamwork. These are not abstract shifts; they represent changes in day-to-day interactions that directly affect how jails operate.

Second, officers in the treatment jail experienced meaningful gains in mental health. Depression scores decreased by 4.85 points, anxiety by 4.43 points, and burnout by 6.08 points, while outcomes in the control jails remained largely unchanged (Ferdik et al., 2025). Given the well-documented stressors of correctional work, these reductions are operationally significant. Third, the study helps explain how leadership produces these effects. Changes in officer mental health were partially driven by shifts in organizational culture. In practical terms, leadership influences outcomes by shaping the environment in which officers work every day.

These findings demonstrate that leadership is not just a management concept; it is a measurable, evidence-based lever for improving jail operations, staff well-being, and overall institutional functioning.

What This Means for Jail Operations

For practitioners, the key takeaway is not that leadership theory matters—it is that specific leadership behaviors produce measurable operational outcomes. This study moves leadership from an abstract concept to a practical lever for improving jail performance. Leadership should be viewed as part of core jail operations, not as a separate or secondary function. The way supervisors communicate, support staff, and make decisions directly affects unit stability, staff retention, and overall safety. Crucially, the intervention tested in this study was not resource-intensive or structurally disruptive. It focused on training and behavior change among existing leaders—an approach that is feasible for most agencies.

Implementation Box: Putting Servant Leadership into Practice

The following implementation box translates the study’s findings into practical, day-to-day actions for jail supervisors. In this box, it becomes evident that servant leadership is not theoretical; it can be applied through consistent behaviors, communication, and decision-making. In practice, this means prioritizing staff support, clear communication, and fairness. Supervisors who implement this approach are visible on the floor, predictable across shifts, and aligned with agency expectations. Over time, these behaviors help create a more positive and consistent work environment for staff.

Core Practices

Conduct brief, structured shift briefings to communicate expectations and updates
Explain the rationale behind decisions, especially those affecting staff workload or safety
Recognize officer effort and performance regularly—not just during formal evaluations
Maintain consistent, fair enforcement of policies across staff
Create opportunities for officers to raise concerns and provide input

How to Achieve This Goal

Integrate leadership training into standard supervisor development programs
Pilot servant leadership training with a small group of supervisors before scaling
Use anonymous officer surveys to measure culture and leadership perceptions
Review results regularly and adjust training and supervision practices accordingly
Reinforce expectations through command staff modeling and accountability

What to Measure

Officer perceptions of leadership (fairness, communication, support)
Organizational culture indicators (teamwork, shared vision, trust)
Staff outcomes (burnout, stress, retention, absenteeism)
Operational indicators (grievances, disciplinary incidents, use of force trends)

Conclusion: From Vague Concept to Measurable Practice

Leadership in corrections has long been treated as an important but loosely defined concept. This study shows that leadership can be more clearly defined, systematically trained, and rigorously evaluated—even in the complex environment of a jail. By using an experimental design, still rare in correctional research, this work provides strong evidence that servant leadership can improve both organizational culture and officer well-being. Just as importantly, it demonstrates that these improvements can be achieved through practical changes in how supervisors lead day to day.

For jail administrators, the message is straightforward. Leadership is not just about setting direction—it is about shaping the daily experience of staff. When that experience improves, so do outcomes. In a field where many challenges are difficult to control, leadership is one of the few factors agencies can directly influence. The evidence suggests it is also one of the most impactful.

Frank V. Ferdik, PhD

Frank V. Ferdik, Ph.D., is an Assistant Professor of Criminal Justice at Austin Peay State University whose research examines correctional staff culture and organizational ethics. His work predominantly focuses on statewide jail operations and staff wellness. He has presented his research to agencies and professional associations throughout Tennessee and the United States. Currently, Dr. Ferdik teaches courses in corrections and serves as Director of the Office of Student Research and Innovation at APSU. For more information, he can be contacted at ferdikf@apsu.edu

Hayden P. Smith, PhD

Hayden P. Smith, Ph.D., is a Professor in the Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice at the University of South Carolina. His research examines the intersection of correctional systems, public health, and law, with particular emphasis on suicide prevention, mental illness in custody, PREA, use of force, and correctional officer decision‑making. He has served as an expert witness and consultant on jail and prison conditions, operational practices, and compliance with national correctional standards. For more information, he can be contacted at Smithhp@mailbox.sc.edu

References

Ferdik, F., Smith, H. P., & Tanner, J. C. (2025). Testing the effects of a servant leadership intervention using a cluster randomized experiment. Justice Quarterly. Advance online publication.

Greenleaf, R. K. (1970). The servant as leader. Robert K. Greenleaf Center.